Software Model Checking: 20 Years and Beyond

Beyer, Dirk; Podelski, Andreas

doi:10.1007/978-3-031-22337-2_27

Cited by 9 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 198 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…В формуле (10) Из декларативной LTL-спецификации поведения программы возведения числа в квадрат (листинг 1) получим императивную LTL-спецификацию и выполним преобразование согласно шаблону (11). Инициализацию выполним для каждой переменной с помощью ключевого слова init.…”

Section: 𝑑𝑐𝑙_𝐿𝑇 𝐿 𝑖𝑚𝑝_𝐿𝑇 𝐿 𝑑𝑐𝑙_𝑆𝑀𝑉 𝑖𝑚𝑝_𝑆𝑀𝑉 𝑑𝑐𝑙𝑆𝑀𝑉 𝑖𝑚𝑝𝑆𝑀𝑉unclassified

“…Преобразование a 4 . Аналогично преобразованию 𝑎 3 в шаблоне (11) перенесём оператор next внутрь всех выражений cond i , expr i , получим выражения 𝑋 cond i и 𝑋 expr i соответственно, где 𝑖 = 1, . .…”

Section: бисимуляционное преобразование Smv-спецификацийunclassified

“…Эта LTL-спецификация является конструктивной в том смысле, что по ней может быть построен программный код УПО на некотором стандартном [8] языке программирования. Предварительно LTL-спецификация может быть непосредственно верифицирована на предмет соответствия заданным темпоральным свойствам методом проверки модели (model checking) [9][10][11] с помощью инструмента символьной верификации nuXmv [12]. При этом не требуется переводить LTL-формулы спецификации в другой формализм -SMV-спецификацию (код на входном языке инструмента nuXmv).…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

See 2 more Smart Citations

Verification of declarative LTL-specification of control programs behavior

Neyzov,

Kuzmin

2024

Model. anal. inf. sist.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The article continues the series of works on development and verification of control programs based on LTL-specifications of a special type. Previously, it was proposed a declarative LTL-specification, which allows describing the behavior of control programs and building program code based on it in the imperative ST-language for programmable logic controllers. The LTL-specification can be directly verified for compliance with specified temporal properties by the model checking method using the nuXmv symbolic verification tool. In general, it is not required translating LTL-formulas of the specification into another formalism — an SMV-specification (code in the input language of the nuXmv tool). The purpose of this work is to explore alternative ways of representing a program behavior model corresponding to the declarative LTL-specification during its verification within the nuXmv tool. In the article, we transform the declarative LTL-specification into various SMV-specifications with accompanying changes of formulation of the verification problem, what leads to a significant reduction in time costs when checking temporal properties by using the nuXmv tool. The acceleration of verification is due to the reduction of the state space of a model being verified. The SMV-specifications obtained as a result of the proposed transformations specify identical or bisimulationally equivalent transition systems. It is ensuring the same verification results when replacing one SMV-specification with another.

show abstract

Section: 𝑑𝑐𝑙_𝐿𝑇 𝐿 𝑖𝑚𝑝_𝐿𝑇 𝐿 𝑑𝑐𝑙_𝑆𝑀𝑉 𝑖𝑚𝑝_𝑆𝑀𝑉 𝑑𝑐𝑙𝑆𝑀𝑉 𝑖𝑚𝑝𝑆𝑀𝑉unclassified

Section: бисимуляционное преобразование Smv-спецификацийunclassified

Section: Introductionunclassified

See 1 more Smart Citation

Verification of declarative LTL-specification of control programs behavior

Neyzov,

Kuzmin

2024

Model. anal. inf. sist.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Verification in the design phase cannot guarantee the absence of bugs in the final deliveries. The software model-checking community focuses on the analysis of real implementations, written in mainstream programming languages such as Java or C [6]. This article focuses on utilizing software model checking in the context of distributed systems using Java.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Software Model Checking Distributed Applications: A Hybrid Approach

Hing Ratana,

Sharifah Mashita Syed-Mohamad,

Chan Huah Yong

2024

ARASET

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Developing reliable distributed systems poses many challenges such as concurrency, failure handling, and scalability. It is due to the non-deterministic execution of threads within processes, and communication means. Formal verification methods, such as model checking, have been used to ensure the reliability of safety-critical systems. This technique systematically explores the complete behavior of the system under test (SUT), investigating each reachable state with different thread schedules. Recent software model-checking tools, employing cache and centralization, have been applied to distributed systems. The caching technique can only check one process at a time, while the centralization technique verifies all processes simultaneously. In the centralization technique, two "ArrayByteQueue" buffers are utilized to store communication and process data byte-by-byte. However, during the backtracking process, the read and write operations, involving data insertion and removal from the queue, become resource-intensive. As a consequence, existing interprocess communication (IPC) models encounter computational limitations and experience a rapid state space explosion. To address these challenges, our work proposes the remodeling of IPC models by introducing a request and response tree structure to store communication data. Additionally, we employ pointers to navigate through the data during the backtracking process. Through experimental evaluations, the proposed implementation choices have demonstrated significantly improved performance across various metrics. By incorporating the request and response tree, we enhance the efficiency of storing communication data, while the use of pointers optimizes navigation during backtracking. This remodeling of IPC models shows promise in mitigating computational limitations and state space explosion, thereby enhancing the model-checking process in distributed systems. Our research contributes to advancing the field of model checking in distributed systems and offers potential solutions to the challenges associated with resource-intensive read and write operations during the model-checking process.

show abstract

Bridging Hardware and Software Analysis with Btor2C: A Word-Level-Circuit-to-C Translator

Beyer

Chien

Lee

2023

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Across the broad research field concerned with the analysis of computational systems, research endeavors are often categorized by the respective models under investigation. Algorithms and tools are usually developed for a specific model, hindering their applications to similar problems originating from other computational systems. A prominent example of such a situation is the area of formal verification and testing for hardware and software systems. The two research communities share common theoretical foundations and solving methods, including satisfiability, interpolation, and abstraction refinement. Nevertheless, it is often demanding for one community to benefit from the advancements of the other, as analyzers typically assume a particular input format. To bridge the gap between the hardware and software analysis, we propose Btor2C, a translator from word-level sequential circuits to C programs. We choose the Btor2 language as the input format for its simplicity and bit-precise semantics. It can be deemed as an intermediate representation tailored for analysis. Given a Btor2 circuit, Btor2C generates a behaviorally equivalent program in the language C, supported by many static program analyzers. We demonstrate the use cases of Btor2C by translating the benchmark set from the Hardware Model Checking Competitions into C programs and analyze them by tools from the Intl. Competitions on Software Verification and Testing. Our results show that software analyzers can complement hardware verifiers for enhanced quality assurance: For example, the software verifier VeriAbs with Btor2C as preprocessor found more bugs than the best hardware verifiers ABC and AVR in our experiment.

show abstract

Software Model Checking: 20 Years and Beyond

Cited by 9 publications

References 198 publications

Verification of declarative LTL-specification of control programs behavior

Verification of declarative LTL-specification of control programs behavior

Software Model Checking Distributed Applications: A Hybrid Approach

Bridging Hardware and Software Analysis with Btor2C: A Word-Level-Circuit-to-C Translator

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About